Mothering Forums - Reply to Topic
Thread: Studies demonstrating HPV vaccine is both safe and effective Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
11-29-2012 11:23 PM
prosciencemum Thanks for the link Rrrrrachel - that was a really interesting discussion about something I'd not heard about before actually. smile.gif

It'll be interesting to see when India decides it should switch to te safer, but less effective and more expensive version of the vaccine which does not carry a risk of vaccine induced polio. I wouldnt be surprised is wealthy Indians aren't already choosing that for their families.
11-28-2012 05:19 PM
Rrrrrachel http://www.mothering.com/community/t/1350135/paralysis-cases-continue-to-rise-experts-speak-out-against-who-and-gates
11-28-2012 05:02 PM
Rrrrrachel As I recall there was a reaaalllyyyy long thread about this awhile ago.
11-28-2012 04:14 PM
beckybird

As India declares itself "polio-free", what about this:

 

“There were 47,500 cases of non-polio paralysis reported in 2011, the same year India was declared ‘polio-free,’ according to Dr. Vashisht and Dr. Puliyel.” Further, “the available data shows that the incidents tracked back to areas were doses of the polio vaccine were frequently administered. The national rate of NPAFP in India is 25-35 times the international average.”

11-28-2012 04:03 PM
Mirzam
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

Is just not true. Vaccine induced cases of polio are very rare and not a significant fraction of cases even in the third world.

India announced it has been polio free for a year recently. Let's hope that a final push in the final few countries with any significant numbers of cases (Afghanistan, Pakistan and Niger? I think) erradicates it completely soon

No, vaccine induced polio is not rare, but they make it look that way because it has been renamed, accute flacid paralysis.

 

From: CDC and Friends Sprinting Towards the Polio "Finish Line"

11-28-2012 03:46 PM
erigeron
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

I'm guessing most people on a site like mothering agree its best to avoid pharmaceuticals you don't need. Heck, I'm guessing most people in general agree with that.

To be entirely fair, in my offline life as a pharmacist I do encounter a decent amount of people taking stuff they don't actually need on the grounds that it probably won't hurt even if it doesn't help. (Mostly with OTC stuff.) I think it often comes down to ignorance, either inadvertent or willful. They don't know what would be the best treatment, so they just pick something that seems vaguely likely, OR they know that X probably isn't the thing to treat Y but they took it before (when they had something different) and it worked so they're going to take it anyway. 

 

/offtopic

11-28-2012 02:11 PM
prosciencemum Is just not true. Vaccine induced cases of polio are very rare and not a significant fraction of cases even in the third world.

India announced it has been polio free for a year recently. Let's hope that a final push in the final few countries with any significant numbers of cases (Afghanistan, Pakistan and Niger? I think) erradicates it completely soon
11-26-2012 07:56 PM
Taximom5

How odd, then, that the persistence of polio in third-world countries is due to the vaccine: http://www.dailypaul.com/259831/vaccine-induced-strain-of-polio-sweeping-india

11-26-2012 03:00 PM
Rrrrrachel Maybe I should've said they don't all have programs as successful as ours. Point is, there are still plenty of places in the world vpds persist due to lack of vaccination, even if they do have a "program."
11-26-2012 12:55 PM
Mirzam
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Well, most of the, all but have been in the United States. Not all countries have vaccination programs, though, so that allows them to persist. Pockets where the vaccination rate is low in the us do, as well.

Which ones might they be? I have been through the WHO national vaccine schedule and didn't find a country without a program. Afghanistan, Angola, Malawi, Maldives, Republic of Korea, all have programs, I could go on, but I will give you the link, it is interesting reading.

 

http://apps.who.int/immunization_monitoring/en/globalsummary/scheduleselect.cfm

11-26-2012 12:14 PM
Rrrrrachel Well, most of the, all but have been in the United States. Not all countries have vaccination programs, though, so that allows them to persist. Pockets where the vaccination rate is low in the us do, as well.
11-26-2012 11:56 AM
pek64 If the viruses are not mutating, then why haven't the vpds been eliminated?
11-26-2012 11:52 AM
Rrrrrachel

I'm not sure how improved sanitation would help with an air born disease, although certainly it would help with the few diseases that are spread through contact with feces.

11-26-2012 11:43 AM
AmandaT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post


I disagree. Without vaccines these various diseases return and my child is at risk.

Maybe. 

 

The diseases will return, but it is likely they will not be as prevalent because of improved sanitation. Then your child would have to actually contract the disease. Then your child would have to have complications from what are (mostly) benign childhood diseases. 

 

Polio 95% of all cases are asymptomatic

Chickenpox while uncomfortable, very rarely an actual health risk

"Rubella infection of children and adults is usually mild, self-limiting and often asymptomatic" as per Wikipedia

 

... you get my point, fussy baby is calling me 

11-26-2012 11:42 AM
Rrrrrachel
Quote:
Originally Posted by pek64 View Post

The diseases haven't been eliminated, because they mutate, so children are at risk now, with vaccinations.

 

 

There is SOME preliminary research that implies that MAY be the case for ONE disease.

11-26-2012 11:42 AM
Rrrrrachel
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

 

 

We were discussing need.  You may have noticed I said "even if no one vaxxed" - meaning even if rubella (for example) returned in full force, I do not see the need to vaccinate a healthy toddler for it.  It does not matter who shoots holes in who's study…..if there is no need for a vaccine, there is no need for a vaccine.  

 

 

That's a matter of opinion, I guess.

11-26-2012 11:39 AM
pek64 The diseases haven't been eliminated, because they mutate, so children are at risk now, with vaccinations.
11-26-2012 11:33 AM
kathymuggle
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post


I disagree. Without vaccines these various diseases return and my child is at risk.

 

 

 

We were discussing need.  You may have noticed I said "even if no one vaxxed" - meaning even if rubella (for example) returned in full force, I do not see the need to vaccinate a healthy toddler for it.  It does not matter who shoots holes in who's study…..if there is no need for a vaccine, there is no need for a vaccine.  

11-26-2012 11:17 AM
Rrrrrachel
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

Then it comes down to the word "need".

In a literal sense - no one needs a vaccine.  A vaccine is given to a healthy person.

I don't think my kids need the majority of vaccines that are availible, even assuming no one vaxxed, and even assuming the only risks to vaccines were those agreed upon and accepted by pro-vaxxers. 

I disagree. Without vaccines these various diseases return and my child is at risk.
11-26-2012 11:17 AM
Rrrrrachel I'm not sure that's actually the case, bokonon. I take my advice about things like vaccination more from organizations like acip, aap, or iom that have used experts an studies the matter extensively, though. Then discuss that with y doctor who is an expert on medicine and knows the particulars of my child, though. Not so much computer scientists and inorganic chemists.
11-26-2012 09:58 AM
Taximom5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokonon View Post

Most pediatricians have no particular expertise in immunology or vaccines - does that mean their opinions and observations are irrelevant?

Paul Offit has no expertise whatsoever in autism, seizure disorders, asthma, autoimmune disorders, rheumatoid arthritis, bowel disorders, etc--yet he insists vaccines are safe.

Meanwhile, experts in those disorders acknowledge that at least for a subset, vaccines are the trigger or even the direct cause.
11-26-2012 09:16 AM
Bokonon
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post


Except she is essentially just a random person off the street, since she has no particular expertise in immunology or vaccines and her studies were of questionable quality and mostly involved running statistical tests on a computer.

 

Most pediatricians have no particular expertise in immunology or vaccines - does that mean their opinions and observations are irrelevant?

11-26-2012 09:15 AM
kathymuggle
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

I'm guessing most people on a site like mothering agree its best to avoid pharmaceuticals you don't need. Heck, I'm guessing most people in general agree with that.

Then it comes down to the word "need".

 

In a literal sense - no one needs a vaccine.  A vaccine is given to a healthy person.

 

I don't think my kids need the majority of vaccines that are availible, even assuming no one vaxxed, and even assuming the only risks to vaccines were those agreed upon and accepted by pro-vaxxers. 

11-26-2012 07:36 AM
Rrrrrachel I'm guessing most people on a site like mothering agree its best to avoid pharmaceuticals you don't need. Heck, I'm guessing most people in general agree with that.
11-26-2012 07:34 AM
kathymuggle
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post


Except she is essentially just a random person off the street, since she has no particular expertise in immunology or vaccines and her studies were of questionable quality and mostly involved running statistical tests on a computer.

Right.  You hate each others studies.  I am shocked and surprised.

 

I guess it boils down to what philosophy you start with - I think it is best to avoid pharmaceuticals unless you truly need them.  I think that has the best chance of conferring health.  To each their own.   

11-26-2012 07:25 AM
Rrrrrachel
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirzam View Post

Well, this woman's educated opinion is based on having conducted several research papers on vaccine safety. It's not like she is some random person, putting her 2 cents in.

Oh, your comments don't have any effect on me whatsoever, I was taking into account what others have said about debate threads being unhelpful. 

#WaterOffADucksBack

Except she is essentially just a random person off the street, since she has no particular expertise in immunology or vaccines and her studies were of questionable quality and mostly involved running statistical tests on a computer.
11-26-2012 07:16 AM
kathymuggle
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

I thought it might be interesting to draw parallels between this thread and the one

on why people follow Medical Authorites: http://www.mothering.com/community/t/1368637/why-do-people-follow-medical-authorities

 

Trying to be moderate I think I would suggest these two threads show that we should respect the advice/opinions of people who have more expertise in an area than ourselves, without having to agree with every assessment they make. 

 

 

Respect the opinions of?  What does that really mean? 

 

I firmly believe in informed choice - which is quite different from "trust your doctor and do what what he or she says"

 

Informed choice means get as much legitimate information as you can (a hcp may be one source of info) and make your choice...as you will undoubtably be the one to live with any consequences. 

11-26-2012 07:00 AM
prosciencemum

I thought it might be interesting to draw parallels between this thread and the one

on why people follow Medical Authorites: http://www.mothering.com/community/t/1368637/why-do-people-follow-medical-authorities

 

Trying to be moderate I think I would suggest these two threads show that we should respect the advice/opinions of people who have more expertise in an area than ourselves, without having to agree with every assessment they make. 

 

 

11-26-2012 06:47 AM
Mirzam
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Whatever, one woman's opinion, same deal. I'm sorry that a simple mistake in gender pronouns makes things unbearable to read for you.

Well, this woman's educated opinion is based on having conducted several research papers on vaccine safety. It's not like she is some random person, putting her 2 cents in.

 

Oh, your comments don't have any effect on me whatsoever, I was taking into account what others have said about debate threads being unhelpful. 

 

#WaterOffADucksBack

11-26-2012 06:21 AM
Rrrrrachel Whatever, one woman's opinion, same deal. I'm sorry that a simple mistake in gender pronouns makes things unbearable to read for you.
This thread has more than 30 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off